saw your work on the tombs. I checked the ref that is being used for "american manhood" and that text occurs no where on that page, so if you have a good ref for valor, I would just change it and get rid of the confusion. Gaijin42 ( talk) 05:32, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

The reference to "American Manhood" is in the cited source in the section of the representation of the three Greek figures. I do cite the "valor" reference also. Which representation is right...?? I do not know so that is why I kept both OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 16:55, 9 November 2011 (UTC) reply

on your user page, then your name will appear in blue ink instead of red ink, making you seem like not such a new editor. Either way, nice to have you around. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 18:10, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Do not know how to change the ink color OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 18:16, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Go to your User page (not the talk page) and type in anything. A period . or two .. This will change the ink color in your name. Oh yes, on a conversation such as this if you type a : or two :: before you answer, then it will indent your reply, making it easier to follow who says what. Carptrash ( talk) 18:29, 10 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I have posted almost all that I can. Once I receive the chronology of work in Vermont and Arlington that will exhaust my information OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 19:05, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Great. Then you can move on and edit another article. Or two. Keeping Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on your watchlist, of course. Carptrash ( talk) 01:41, 12 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I have some photos that I want to add but my account needs to be 4 days old. When I receive the above two chronologies, I will put them on Wiki Commons and reference them as the source for my last article additions. History needs dates, times, places, names of people. The data I am hoping to get in the two chronologies is not available in any readily found published source but the data will be from valid sources (so.... "published on Wiki"). I am really anxious to find out where the WWI remains are in relation to the levels in the Tomb.

I will check in on the Tomb article.

I have almost completed a total rewrite of the Wiki article Yule Marble. Some of the geologic data needs to be gone into but other than that, I have finished. Purged a lot of external links that were dead or had nothing to do with the article. I did my writing in the html Wiki editor but copied into Outlook Express as html for spell checking OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 09:07, 12 November 2011 (UTC) reply

in New Mexico, one of the few places better than Colorado (though my mother is from Pueblo), but I do a fair amount of linking on wikipedia. It bothers me when a link goes to a page that is less than the best destination, so I try and figure out where it should go, and then go it there. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 21:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Though I am the director of the museum in Marble, Colorado, I live in Houston. Go up to Marble in the summer for 4 months to drive jeep tours. My mom was born in Golden and my dad in Olathe (on a farm).

The reference format you made worked out great for I added a text desciption after the link. Cleans up the "References" section really nice by hiding those long link strings. I did the same format change to the rest of the references and in the "External Reference" A great digital source of quarry info is now at hand OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 08:11, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Usually :s are used in these discussions to indent the various different voices, making it easier to follow and take part in. Meanwhile you are doing a wonderful thing at Yule. There are editors who understand how to get articles selected for the daily DYK (Did You Know) section of the wikipedia front page. If you are interested it might be worth looking into. Carptrash ( talk) 15:29, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I am interested in DYK and getting the article rated. Before DYK and rating, there is still content to work on. The intro section will also be scraped for it completely misses the key points of Yule marble. Less than 1% of the original article remains and shrinking. Interesting how the Yule article has worked out. I had some vague ideas when I started but it seemed to develope on its own and I was along for the drive though there were some wrong turns along the way. OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 17:15, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

When you think (feel?) that you have it shaped the way that you want, go to the links on the left and head for "Community portal" there you'll find the "Village Pump" and somewhere in either the portal or the pump you will find a bunch of very nice and helpful editors who can help you with rating and DYK info. I have never gotten into that stuff, mostly because I know that I am a process person and not a finished product person. But first, get the article where it needs to be. Carptrash ( talk) 19:56, 14 November 2011 (UTC) reply

at Lincoln Memorial and I expect to see you other places on my watchlist too. I'll check out Yule Marble later, this is just a quick --smash and grab]] edit. Carptrash ( talk) 23:10, 19 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I know almost nothing about the subject, except in the most peripheral sense. I've seen the monuments, and I loved Hanging Lake, which is in the area. Just trying to help out. I've always been partial to footnotes and endnotes, and think that it makes it look more scholarly (even if it isn't). I've put out feelers to try and get a bot to clean up the references. It could be done manually, but it would take considerable effort that might be avoided. Nice job on the article (it probably could be edited down some more, but that takes intense effort, as you know). Happy editing and cheers!. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 00:35, 20 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Took care of the references. I would note that having experts come in and edit is a good thing, but it is controversial and is seen to create problems. I had to intervene to get a first tier mathematician the running room to write about his own theories. See Pentagram map, where Richard Schwartz (who developed the theories and proof) was needlessly and disgracefully given a hard time. Citing to yourself is not a conflict, and does not preclude your from being WP:RS. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 03:26, 20 November 2011 (UTC) reply

See WP:EXPERT or WP:SELFCITE. I also think you should be given some deference Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers which should apply. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 03:56, 20 November 2011 (UTC) reply

The amount of text is considerably more than other Wiki articles irregardless of topic. I did so for I find most Wiki articles are to thin without going to the reference sources, external links etc. For that reason, I created the article beyond the casual reader (having to much being better than not enough). At the same time I did limit what I could have added to keep the content from being overwhelming. I want editing of the article that will improve readability but I will vigorously challenge such editing that removes any of any facts. I welcome new facts or changes to the exiting facts. I will though look into such editing and I will undo if in conflict with the sources that I have used (especially if the cited source is a website for they are almost always unsourced and often contain errors). I have also found reputable sources with errors concerning the marble operation OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 05:56, 20 November 2011 (UTC) reply

They don't have to be mere Ipse dixit. Wikipedia is a gigantic encyclopedia, and there are good and thoroughly researched article that are written to a better standard. I am happy to have been involved with some better researched articles, e.g. Sherman Minton, White Shoal Light (Michigan), Barber pole, Bill Smith (fell runner) and Three hares, for example. The latter is an example of an article you would probably not find in a print encyclopedia (although the German wikipedia article on the subject is more like what you would find, if there was an article on the subject). I digress, but my main point is that you can make the articles you are working on almost as good as you like; unless you get someone who is opposing, pushy, and wrong-headed in an edit war. See Otium, for example, where improvement of content seems to be secondary to personalities for some (they forget WP:dick). The project is worthwhile, and one should not let a few bad experiences sour the relationship. You can change the areas you are interested in, one article at a time, and that's all you can do. If I can help in any way, please let me know. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 11:58, 20 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Welcome!

Hello, OneHistoryGuy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 00:37, 20 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I was involved with one previous Wiki article with a differrent account name. I came to the article as an expert but the experience left me disgusted and angry. Because of that, I did not want to undertake this article with the previous account.

I have enjoyed writing this article and it has been a pleasure dealing with the editors I have encountered with this article. It has been a long time since I have written this extensively in a flowing narrative form. OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 10:03, 20 November 2011 (UTC) reply

I'm kind of inspired by this article. I think that Einar/Carp can come up with come up with some sculptural material. I'm a wild and crazy guy. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 01:26, 21 November 2011 (UTC) reply

You might want to go to wikipedia "preferences" and enable e-mail. You would then put an indication on your WP:user page or talk page. Everything you post on Wikipedia can be accessed by someone. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 01:45, 21 November 2011 (UTC) reply

An image used in this article, File:TousRepairSep2011.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 21 November 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

• If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
• If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 12:38, 21 November 2011 (UTC) reply

All those wiki linked article need to reference, mention or "See also" and then have a back link. It took some real time to find this. If you go to the general Wikipedia search page, you can use the "advanced' feature and it will bring up lots of articles that have the phrase in the article. It just takes perseverance. Grunt and scut work. Unfortunately, the Otis Building in Chicago is a very old building, and there just isn't an article, and indeed, I've found very little about it on Google. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 17:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC) reply

It's never complete. That being said, I've moved on for now. Have to earn a living. There were a couple of issues (Irvine Sarcophagus for example, and the name of Broke Arrow, for example) that need to be resolved if you can. The articles that we have linked (or will link) from the article need to be back linked to the article. Hope all is well. Keep up the good work. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 13:09, 8 December 2011 (UTC) reply

I understand about your needing to move on. You devoted lot of time and effort with the article and brought it up to a level that I could not have reached. If you should happen to find yourself in Marble, Colorado this coming summer (or after that), look me up at the museum or Crystal River Jeep Tours. Much gratitude OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 20:35, 8 December 2011 (UTC) reply

The closest I get to Marble is Eagle and Vail, and then only for a short visit. Thanks for the invite. I was trying to elevate it, and hope that it helped. This was one of those subjects where I learned a lot, as I knew almost nothing going in. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 21:06, 8 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Congratulations on getting this rated as "B" class. Those are not easy to come by. Keep up the good work. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 18:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Would not have received the B rating had it not been your extensive efforts. OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 05:55, 10 December 2011 (UTC) reply

And yours. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 00:26, 11 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi, Guy! I went back through, made it to "Today" and hope I didn't do any (or much?) damage. There's so much going on here, it's sometimes hard for me to track the technical details. I follow the picky copyediting details better, but may not be current with the MoS. Trying to get a geologist friend interested (she was leader of GS 357), but it's a tough time of year with all the holiday activity! I need to move on, but will keep an eye out! Good luck with the GA! -- Araucana ( talk) 18:19, 22 December 2011 (UTC) reply

I suggest you rate it yourself. Nothing to prevent that. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 13:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC) reply

Regarding Broken Bow vs. Broken Arrow, Nebraska in Yule Marble: Unfortunately, I think your phone conversations would count as WP:OR. However, we don't want to leave an error in the article, however well-sourced it might be. I'll change the name to "Broken Bow" and add a footnote stating that Perazzo calls it "Broken Arrow", but that a Google search for "Broken Arrow, Nebraska" and a search for "Broken Arrow" on the Nebraska State Historical Society website both come up with no indication that such a city actually exists or existed.

Errors in sources are a rich source of irritation, aren't they? I'm in the course of writing a note to a brother editor to try to dissuade him from writing short stubs based on single sources, and one of my arguments is that errors in the sources go undetected that way. The errors in WP then get picked up by other sources, which makes it harder to detect and correct them. As Randall Munroe explains it... Ammodramus ( talk) 11:34, 8 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Oh, and: If you're working on Yule Marble, it might be a good idea to Wikilink the city names, since some of them are kind of small and obscure. The appearance of a redlink would also have given you a warning about the "Broken Arrow" business. Ammodramus ( talk) 11:53, 8 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your edits of the article and the means to change such errors as "Broken". I will Wikilink the cities for which the structure does not have a wikilink.

Can the following be somehow entered into the article that is Wiki compliant for I have other buildings on the list that fall into this category. The unidentified bank building in Sheridan, Wyoming began as the "Bank of Commerce" and today is First Interstate Bank. The director of the Sheridan County Museum provided me with the information and photo. I do not have the right to place the photo on Commons. Does the museum director's information still constitute original research? OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 20:58, 8 December 2011 (UTC) reply

If you respond to one of my comments here on this page, could you please leave a short note at my own talk page to let me know? I've got your page on my watchlist right now, but might take it off if you get into a lot of other conversations. Thanks.

I'm not really well versed in the ins and outs of Wikipolicy, but I'm pretty sure that you can't cite a personal communication. However, this website seems to contain most of the information that you've mentioned getting from the museum director.

If you're researching an old building, it's worth checking to see if it's on the National Register of Historic Places, or located in a Historic District that's listed. In this case, there's a Sheridan Main Street Historic District that includes your building. The nomination form for the district is online here. It doesn't say a lot about the bank, but does mention "smooth white blocks of marble facing". The National Park Service is slowly, slowly putting nom forms online; you can search for them at this URL, which is what got me to the nom form for the Sheridan HD. (Googling "focus" and "national register" also gets you to the NPS search page-- the word "focus" is the trick.)

State historical societies can also be a useful source: in Nebraska, which is my home range, the Nebr. State Historical Society has a lot of nomination forms for NRHP sites online at their website, and I've been able to write them and get copies of a lot of the forms that aren't online yet. (I couldn't cite a direct communication from someone at the NSHS, but the nom form is a published document, so can be cited.) The NSHS also conducts county-by-county historic building surveys, and I assume that other states do something similar; these sometimes give useful information about buildings that aren't actually on the NRHP.

Good luck-- running down sources is one of the frustrating aspects of article-writing, but it makes up for it with the interesting things that turn up in the course of the searching. If you get particularly interested in a building, you should know that structures on the NRHP are automatically considered notable, so article-worthy. There's a very active group at Wikipedia:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places; if you're trying to run down information for a particular state, you might do worse than to leave a note at their discussion page. Ammodramus ( talk) 21:36, 8 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Even more problematical is having some well intentioned but misguided editor remove sources that are pertinent. It is hard to lay down the track, and much easier to tear it up. I leave it to you to figure out which one will result in building the railroad. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 23:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC) reply

	The Original Barnstar
	Now we all know more about Yule Marble than we ever wanted to. Great contribution. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 16:04, 30 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Wow.! A nice surprise. Thanks also to you for your editing efforts OneHistoryGuy ( talk) 17:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC) reply

Barnstars are the closest thing that Wikipedia has to a merit badge. It is one of the few things an editor (we are all editors, and this is not a function limited to administrators) can do to recognize the hard volunteer work someone like you puts into the encyclopedia. Happy New Year! 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 17:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC) reply

The article recently got a nice comment in the "Feedback". Hope all is well with you. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 17:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC) reply

A longevity barnstar.

Wishing you the Peace of the season and prosperity in the New Year. Thanks for your contributions. You've been missed and are fondly remembered. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 00:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC) reply ArbCom elections are now open! Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC) reply ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! Hello, OneHistoryGuy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) reply